What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
New review items
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Reviews
New items
Latest content
Latest reviews
Latest questions
Brands
Search reviews
Opus
Birds & Bird Song
Locations
Resources
Contribute
Recent changes
Blogs
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
ZEISS
ZEISS Nature Observation
The Most Important Optical Parameters
Innovative Technologies
Conservation Projects
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is
absolutely FREE
!
Register for an account
to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Forums
Birding
Birds & Birding
Possible ABA area boundary change
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mysticete" data-source="post: 1574772" data-attributes="member: 67784"><p>Random replies to everyone:</p><p></p><p>On field guide coverage: I would say that the definition of the ABA area does indeed affect field guides moreso than other naturalist interests. One of the prominent guides after all is the the Nat Geo, which takes the time in the newest editions to illustrate EVERY possible vagrant recorded in the US. The average person interested in nature in the US probably doesn't care about all the Aleutian/Gambel ultra megas, but they are illustrated. And the bird guide market is by far the largest; birders are more likely to buy new editions and multiple different field guides than the average consumer. If a general nature audience was the main target, than I would expect to see similar numbers of guides to at least mammals, and probably herps as well.</p><p></p><p>On year listing; Kingbird Highway made it sound awesome, but I do kind of cringe at the concept of a big year. Beyond any environmental impact, you need to have deep pockets and lots of free time. A US year list says nothing about your birding ability, but lots about your financial security. That said, I have always wanted to go to Gambell and St. Paul, even if the vagrants could be easily seen in China on migration.</p><p></p><p>On ABA: I have faintly detected a whiff of desperation for getting new members. I am actually a member (for something like 4 years now); I enjoy the magazine, but I do wonder if the Internet isn't providing the same info for many new birders as the magazine did, and if they are not recruiting another new birders to compensate for loss of older birders. </p><p></p><p>So Chris, from your conversations does expanding the area seem likely? And is this something that might happen within the next year? Or is this largely just to see what the interest in doing so is, and maybe stir up controversy?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mysticete, post: 1574772, member: 67784"] Random replies to everyone: On field guide coverage: I would say that the definition of the ABA area does indeed affect field guides moreso than other naturalist interests. One of the prominent guides after all is the the Nat Geo, which takes the time in the newest editions to illustrate EVERY possible vagrant recorded in the US. The average person interested in nature in the US probably doesn't care about all the Aleutian/Gambel ultra megas, but they are illustrated. And the bird guide market is by far the largest; birders are more likely to buy new editions and multiple different field guides than the average consumer. If a general nature audience was the main target, than I would expect to see similar numbers of guides to at least mammals, and probably herps as well. On year listing; Kingbird Highway made it sound awesome, but I do kind of cringe at the concept of a big year. Beyond any environmental impact, you need to have deep pockets and lots of free time. A US year list says nothing about your birding ability, but lots about your financial security. That said, I have always wanted to go to Gambell and St. Paul, even if the vagrants could be easily seen in China on migration. On ABA: I have faintly detected a whiff of desperation for getting new members. I am actually a member (for something like 4 years now); I enjoy the magazine, but I do wonder if the Internet isn't providing the same info for many new birders as the magazine did, and if they are not recruiting another new birders to compensate for loss of older birders. So Chris, from your conversations does expanding the area seem likely? And is this something that might happen within the next year? Or is this largely just to see what the interest in doing so is, and maybe stir up controversy? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes...
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Birding
Birds & Birding
Possible ABA area boundary change
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more...
Top